Sharp Division and Hermeneutics

And fans of the Pittsburgh Pirates

You may not know that I’m a Pirates fan. Not trying to get sympathy. Just putting that out there.

Home of the Pittsburgh Pirates!

However, you probably do know I am a pastor in the United Methodist Church. Presently, there’s a lot of turmoil in our corner of the Kingdom. Sympathy welcome.

Back in the ‘90’s, a friend of mine transferred his credentials from the UMC to the more conservative Free Methodist Church. I used to tease him with, “Yeah, the Free Methodists are about as free as the United Methodists are united!”

I’m not joking anymore. The Free Methodists have become a LOT less legalistic since then and us United Methodists . . . well, you’ve probably heard the news.

Does this matter for the rest of you? Yes, it actually does. Regardless of your denominational label, there are constant challenges for Tsunami Surfers when we are ministering to members of the LGBTQ+ community.

You can’t boil the UMC’s 50 years of controversy down to one simple issue, though many try. The “one issue” I’ve heard from conservatives more than any other is this: the authority of scripture. Increasingly, I’m hearing centrists and progressives say they believe in scripture’s authority, but that it’s a matter of hermeneutics—how we interpret scripture.

Within the UMC, there’s a movement of progressives who for over 25 years has been working to change the stand of the UMC on “the practice of homosexuality.” Known as the Reconciling Ministries Network, they have chapters in every region of the United States, including western Pennsylvania. Several times I’ve attended their events simply to try to understand their message. They wouldn’t label themselves “traditional” in any sense of the word, but they still believe the Bible is on their side. As one prominent pastor said at the first event, “If anyone wants to debate me about what the Bible says regarding homosexual practice, I say ‘Bring it on!’”

Years later, a much larger event included a variety of speakers, lunch, and a concluding worship service. One lecturer was Dr. Steven Tuell, Old Testament professor at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary and a clergy member of our denomination. In one of his teachings, he gave an analysis of Romans 1, the most jagged scriptural burr under the saddle of progressives. That passage not only clearly identifies male same-sex relations, but it is the only passage addressing lesbian relations. All of us listened with piqued interest.

He did an excellent job interpreting that chapter, carefully framing it within the cultural context of the Roman church, and how it related to the rest of the letter. I couldn’t have agreed with him more . . . until his summary statement:

I believe it is clear that Paul understood same-sex behavior as sinful. But I also believe it is ok to say that Paul was wrong. If he lived today, and understood what we now know about orientation, he would have written that chapter differently.[i]

I couldn’t believe he was so lucidly admitting that he disagreed with Paul. And in looking around the room, I could tell there were others who were equally surprised.

Such a handling of scripture leaves interpretation in the hands of each individual. Instead of appealing to cultural context, the original intent of the author, or the content of the historical literature of the time, one looks through a 21st century lens, picking and choosing what to believe.

But this very same approach can render moot any number of foundational beliefs. Historic creeds become simply ink on parchment if we each apply our own hermeneutics.

For example, if we can cast aside the teachings, themes and metaphors for heterosexual marriage which permeate scripture from the Garden of Eden to the Garden of Paradise, what about the Virgin Birth? The conception of Jesus within Mary has far less textual support and is easily dismissed by 20th and 21st century sensibilities.

Hermeneutics does, in fact, matter. But there will always be teachings from scripture which, when properly interpreted, still leave us mystified. We are left with a choice: Bow before the throne with our unanswered questions, or bow to the idolatrous opinions shaped by the philosophers and theorists of this age.

Home of the UM Church that I pastor.

After Dr. Tuell’s teaching, I asked questions to clarify his hermeneutics. Humility and grace were abundant. He was warm and approachable. My questions detained him for a while, so he invited me to sit with him at the concluding worship service. While I certainly disagreed with how he interprets scripture, I knew he was warm and sincere.

As we do ministry with people who are attracted to the same sex, experience gender dysphoria, or are addicted to kink and fetishes, there will be well meaning people who will disagree with us—sometimes forcefully. Some of them will be Christians who believe the Bible is authoritative. We must know fully why we believe what we believe in the face of much cultural confusion and differing hermeneutics.

Dr. Tuell is a die-hard Pirates fan. I think I’d rather sit next to him at PNC Park than some of my conservative buddies.

There are two exceptions, however. A guy named Donnie in Erie, PA, and my Free Methodist friend. Both are huge Buccos fans!

---

[i] This is quoted from memory, so it is not exact. But I can’t help but vividly remember the words, “. . . it is also OK to say that Paul was wrong.”